Comments on: U.S. environmental agency walks a tightrope on CO2 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/ Thu, 21 Jul 2016 07:57:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: mkinla http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13184 Tue, 21 Apr 2009 20:07:29 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13184 you make a really good point about the counterintuitive decision to absolve the utilities, private equity firms and other shareholders in electricity markets who are responsible for a better portion of the emissions.

besides, it would be easier and cheaper to regulate stationary sources of GHGs. there are only a couple technologies and major companies at play versus a globe full of millions of moving targets with multinationals firmly attached to the gov’t teets!

i wonder if they WANT to drive the automakers into bankruptcy on purpose for some reason?

]]>
By: B.Free http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13170 Tue, 21 Apr 2009 14:26:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13170 Of the man made CO2 about 14% to 32% is from transportation depending on whose numbers you want to use. No one really knows how much is man made verses nature made much less how much from what industry. Please keep in mind the following: “Consumption of vegetation by animals & microbes accounts for about 220 gigatonnes of CO2 per year. Respiration by vegetation emits around 220 Gt. The ocean releases about 330 Gt. In contrast, human emissions are only around 26.4 Gt per year.” So, transportation is responsible for about 3.7 to 8.4 Gt per year. The only way to make this be more than a drop in the bucket is if we completely shift from an oil based transportation industry to a total electric transportation industry. And, the problem with that is no one in Congress is looking at this kind of scenario. There are ways to do this. Here is a 1996 Discover article on a flywheel engine.

http://www.mega.nu:8080/ampp/bitterly.ht ml

But, the US auto industry and Congress has been controlled by big oil for so long the idea of such devices is avoided like the plague.

If you were to couple affordable LED lighting for home and industry and advances in both portable solar energy and vehicle energy recovery, the increase to the power grids would be minimized while providing the populace with very affordable transportation and a reduction in the CO2 output.

Of course with the increase in volcanism over the last 100 years this drop in CO2 is not significant. But we do not have to tell anybody that fact. I am all for cleaning up our pollution. I wish we would pay as much attention to water and land pollution as we do CO2. We pollute our land and water with so many hideous substances that nature cannot handle like it can handle CO2. I hope we don’t lose sight of these ecologically devastating substances just because it has become popular to jump on the global warming bandwagon. There are more dangers than just global warming and I am not sure I buy all the doom and gloom spread by the Global Warming industries.

]]>
By: Somender Singh http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13159 Tue, 21 Apr 2009 10:31:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13159 Did it need this long for the EPA to disclose some facts that have been obvious for a long time ? It comes at a time where every one is feeling the heat coming on. We are already in the Red Zone, long past recovery. Yet we continue to debate if Global Warmings are real and associated to human activity ?

The same happened in early 2008, when the G20 and its chief financial officers projected a rozy picture of the Global Economy & GDP etc ~ To every ones surprise the whole financial system across the worlds collapsed in their faces ! This time on, it will be the real world we live in, which will surprise us with the biggest collapse ! i think it is far more serious than all the Terror in the world ! Brace your self for the real Jolt ! As i see nobody reacting or coming up with any fire fighting solutions ! CO2 is a Odorless and Tasteless and Colourless gas which can douse out any fire !?

While most are reeling under Financial Melt Downs and hoping a speedy recovery to get back to comfort zones !

All i can say is ~ God Bless all the Air Breathing Engines !

sing !!!

]]>
By: Timmy http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13153 Tue, 21 Apr 2009 04:30:22 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13153 John nicely takes the history of why emissions haven’t been regulated (all political) rumples it up and tosses it over his shoulder. Then writes this article as if it were something new. “The real reason” regulation hasn’t happened is strictly political. Labor is not happy, Big Oil isn’t happy, Big Coal isn’t happy, Democraticans and Republocrats aren’t happy. So, nothing happens. Anybody old enough to remember “Wear a sweater”? What happened to that president?

]]>
By: Michael http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13144 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 22:01:19 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13144 Good article. It’s long past time that leaders made long-term decisions based on science to best manage our planet’s resources rather than continuing to accept the continued rape-and-pollute status quo operations of the highest-bidding corporate interests.

Now that the US finally has a federal administration with the fortitude to require industry and the wasteful US consumer to clean up their acts. As bold as the move appears, however, Obama is not taking big steps here. As the article notes, many illogical pollution exemptions remain. The reason for this is clear: entrenched powers still hold too much sway. The coal industry apparently has convinced legislators that there exists some magic substance called “clean coal” (but there isn’t). Aviation also gets a free pass on emissions, probably because Boeing “invests” regularly in the K-Street lobbyist firms. And let’s not forget agriculture – if you drive a dirty diesel tractor or truck, emitting toxic pollution directly on the food of the nation, then you continue to receive not regulation but SUBSIDIES to continue the reliance on imported fuels or, even less feasible, ethanol incentives.

No doubt Limbaugh will rant for months on how horrible it is to regulate as a way to keep your planet clean and inhabitable for the long term. Limbaugh may also think that the best way to keep a teenager’s room clean is to “allow the free market” and “technology” to keep it from becoming a mess. In reality, the is very modest change in EPA regulatory stance doesn’t threaten any of the entrenched special interests at all.

]]>
By: garish http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13141 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 21:12:56 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13141 BRAVO JOHN… and from the comments posted so far, there appears to unanimous agreement that we citizens are REALLY tired of the self-serving games played by the lawyers, bureaucrats and politicians…. all funded by us taxpayers.

]]>
By: Elizabeth R http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13139 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 20:17:03 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13139 Thank you for a clear, concise and forthright explication of the issues. As an ardent environmentalist and an active Democrat I sometimes get lost in the political hyperbole.

]]>
By: tripswitch http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13133 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 17:58:32 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13133 We don’t go to the doctor to get our taxes done, also we dont go to an accountant for medical advice. Our legislators (with their law or business degrees)have no business writing laws pertaining to a science they have absolutley no knowledge of. I grow tired of all the banter from non-science people on the topic of science. As a leader and legislator, it would behoove the people, to listen and pay attention to the science community. Basing your environmental decisions on a profit margin is rediculous. Its not fair to the subsequent generations who increasingly have to fix the problems caused by these poor decisions.

]]>
By: Adam http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13130 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:42:55 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13130 I think this announcement stands as a warning to those who will oppose cap-and-trade or cap-and-dividend proposals in the near future. The Obama administration seems interested in persuing cap and trade, but there are a number of hurdles to overcome there. I think dangling the threat of allowing the EPA to unilaterally limit emmisions under Title I will give pause to those who wish to oppose cap and trade legislation.

]]>
By: Anubis http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2009/04/20/us-environmental-agency-walks-a-tightrope-on-co2/#comment-13129 Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:40:10 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=3065#comment-13129 You hit the nail squarely on the head John. This is just good public relations for the administration. The fact of the matter is that coal pound for pound produces roughly 30% more CO2 than oil. It is probably asking to much of our elected officials to stand up and behave like “Statesmen” instead of worrying about raising enough money for the next election cycle.

]]>